https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465820 Challenge was raised to the constitutional validity of s.25(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 (as amended in 2016) and to the legality of a customs notification enhancing duty, on the ground that electronic publication could not substitute publication in the Official Gazette, rendering the levy on Bills of Entry filed earlier unlawful. The HC held s.25(4) arbitrary and contrary to s.25(1) and s.25(2A), treated the impugned notification as ineffective for the relevant clearances, and directed refund of excess customs duty and differential IGST with 6% simple interest. In appeal, the SC issued notice, keeping the HC determination open for adjudication. en-us Mon, 02 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Jan 2026 08:25:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465820 Challenge was raised to the constitutional validity of s.25(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 (as amended in 2016) and to the legality of a customs notification enhancing duty, on the ground that electronic publication could not substitute publication in the Official Gazette, rendering the levy on Bills of Entry filed earlier unlawful. The HC held s.25(4) arbitrary and contrary to s.25(1) and s.25(2A), treated the impugned notification as ineffective for the relevant clearances, and directed refund of excess customs duty and differential IGST with 6% simple interest. In appeal, the SC issued notice, keeping the HC determination open for adjudication. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 02 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465820